Social Psychology

What is Social Psychology? The study of how people influence and are influenced by other people. How an individual is affected by the presence or implied presence of another individual or group An individual’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior can all be influenced by the POWER OF THE SITUATION that they are experiencing.

Social Influence Social psychology is a diverse field. We will focus on only one of the major areas of study. Social influence How we are influenced by others Conformity, obedience, compliance

Social Influence Social Influence: A few concepts Social norms Expectations / what is acceptable Behavior, thoughts, affect Social role Sets of norms Expectations for particular position Unofficial Assignment: Violate a norm today (without getting expelled).

Conformity Yield to real or imagined social pressure

Conformity Changing one’s behavior or beliefs to match those of other group members, generally as a result of real or imagined, though unspoken, group pressure. Sometimes conscious, sometimes not. Is conformity good or bad? When?

Why do we conform? Sherif (1930s) AUTOKINETIC EFFECT Was interested in the passing of norms from generation to generation. Put people in a pitch black room that had a stationary pinpoint of light. Would then ask participants how far the light moved. Were questioned in groups of three multiple times. Found that across sessions the answers began to align. After a number of trials a new subject would replace one of the old subjects and would fall right into the group norm.

Why do we conform? Private Conformity: involves both acting and believing in accord with social pressure. Subjects still displayed these beliefs when placed in other groups or were shown the stimulus again and asked in private.

Why do we conform? Asch (1950s) – Disagreed with the studies of Sherif “Perceptual judgments” Only 1 real participant Others: confederates Accomplices All responses scripted

Why do we conform? 18 trials, 50 participants = approximately 900 decisions to conform Conformity on 37% of trials 13 people never conformed, 74% conformed on at least one trial 14 people conformed on more than half their trials

Factors that affect extent of conformity Group size 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 = 5 = 6 = 7 = 8 = 9 = 10 = 11 = 12 … Presence of a dissenter If one other nonconformist , conformity rate drops from 37% to 5% Commitment Prior decision / initial judgment reduces later conformity Individual differences High self esteem = less likely to conform Friends versus strangers Asch method: Less conformity with friends

Why do we conform? Public Conformity: publicly acting in accord with social pressure while privately disagreeing

Why do we conform? Based on these two studies we can conclude two types of influences on conformity. Informational Influence: conformity because you aren’t sure what to do (Private) Normative Influence: Conforming to the group in order to gain acceptance (Public)

Obedience Obedience: change in behavior based on a direct order from an authority figure The figure can be legitimate (Arnal or Muhlhauser) or illegitimate (man holding a gun). Stanley Milgram (1960s)

Obedience The Milgram Experiments 18 studies between 1960 – 1963 “The effects of punishment on learning” Participants were the “teacher” The “learner” was a confederate All learner’s answers pre-scripted

Obedience NO ONE WAS ACTUALLY SHOCKED! Teacher told to give increasingly intense shocks 15 volt increments 15-60 v “slight” 75-120v “moderate” 135-180v “strong” 195-240v “very strong” 255-300 v “intense” 315-360 v “extremely intense” 375-420v “danger-severe shock” 435-450v “XXX” Each time the learner gave wrong answer the next switch was to be flipped. NO ONE WAS ACTUALLY SHOCKED! Except sample 45 volt shock

The Results Predicted: < 1% will obey to end What really happened? 450 volts What really happened? 65% obeyed to the end

Variations of original study: compare to 65% obeying to the very end -- 450 volts No vocal feedback: Participants never heard screams / pounding 93% Proximity of victim: Learner in same room 40% Proximity of victim: Participant had to force the learner’s hand onto metal shock plate 30%

Variations of original study: compare to 65% obeying to the very end -- 450 volts Proximity of authority: Experimenter gave instructions by telephone 20% Personal responsibility: Participant read word pairs, another “teacher” (a confederate) pushed the button 93% agreed to go to 450 volts Gender: Women participants with original methodology 65%

Ethical Implications What do you think of this research?

“A hoax most cruel” April, 2004 David R. Stewart was arrested in June 2004 Charged with solicitation to commit sodomy, impersonating a police officer, soliciting sex abuse, unlawful imprisonment. He pleaded not guilty The trial lasted a week Stewart was not convicted

Compliance Compliance: adjusting one’s behavior because of an explicit request. Key idea is that the requester has no real power or authority. The goal as the requester is to get people to make a commitment.

Compliance Foot – in – the – door technique (Freedman & Fraser, 1966) 1st: Ask for small favor If agree… (99% do) 2nd: Ask large favor 53% compliance Compare: Only large favor 22% compliance Self-perception change “I guess I’m the type of person who…”

Compliance Door – in – the – face technique (Cialdini and others, 1975) 1st: Make large, unreasonable request 0% compliance 2nd: Make second, reasonable request 50% compliance Compare: Only reasonable request 17% compliance Norm of reciprocity Return favors

Compliance Lowballing technique (Cialdini, 1978) Compare: Commitment Make request and obtain compliance without admitting all costs 56% compliance Compare: Request with all costs indicated “up front” 31% compliance Commitment People follow through with decisions

Attitudes

Attitudes Evaluation about some thing Affective component Emotions Behavioral component Predispositions to act Cognitive component Beliefs Attitudes influence future behavior However, sometimes behaviors do not match attitude. Situational factors also impact behavior